Search for: "State v. So "
Results 7161 - 7180
of 116,393
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Jan 2024, 11:59 am
" Biden v. [read post]
1 Jul 2015, 9:01 pm
The standard the City urged for reviewing a facial challenge used language from United States v. [read post]
25 Mar 2008, 4:59 am
U.S. v. [read post]
4 May 2023, 9:01 pm
Harper, the pending Supreme Court case involving the so-called “Independent State Legislature” interpretation of Articles I and II of the Constitution (ISL). [read post]
17 Jul 2007, 4:28 am
United States v. [read post]
7 Sep 2011, 5:59 am
In a decision widely considered the high-water mark of state-action doctrine, Shelley v. [read post]
15 Jul 2008, 12:07 pm
United States v. [read post]
16 Aug 2016, 4:00 am
Recently, in Cuevas v. [read post]
7 Nov 2006, 8:46 am
Philippine Star (via ABS-CBN), Oct. 22, 2006.[5] Bolante v. [read post]
16 Nov 2011, 2:50 pm
According to this notice, the Supreme Court will issue its decision in Perry v. [read post]
25 Oct 2017, 5:24 pm
§ 544(b), allowing recovery of a “transfer of an interest of the debtor in property” if state law criteria are met (though the state laws that this statute incorporates generally do refer to a transfer by the debtor). [read post]
27 Sep 2007, 1:01 pm
The Fifth Circuit acknowledged an Eleventh Circuit decision, United States v. [read post]
3 Jan 2010, 4:03 pm
United States v. [read post]
24 Mar 2020, 3:35 am
Kansas don’t need no stinkin’ rule, and in Kahler v. [read post]
19 Jun 2015, 8:48 am
In a 4-3 decision, in State v. [read post]
28 Jan 2008, 5:11 pm
As stated in [Hayes v. [read post]
5 Apr 2012, 11:00 am
Fowler v. [read post]
22 Aug 2011, 6:57 am
In United States v. [read post]
18 Jul 2015, 4:07 pm
In a very rare outcome, in the case of R (Davis and ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2015] EWHC 2092 (Admin) the Divisional Court declared that the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (DRIPA) is inconsistent with European Union law and therefore is “disapplied”, although the Court suspended the effect of its order until after 31 March 2016. [read post]
Case Law, Strasbourg: Ruusunen v Finland, The Private of Life of a Prime Minister – Dominic Crossley
20 Jan 2014, 4:00 am
Just as we (perhaps more so than the French) are transfixed by the surreptitious scooter-shenanigans of President Francois Hollande, the European Court of Human Rights publishes its judgment in a case concerning the privacy of the Finnish ex-Prime-Minister Matti Vanhanen, Ruusunen v Finland. [read post]
